DOCSLIB.ORG

Research Study on Reuse and Recycling of Batteries Employed in Electric Vehicles

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Research Study on Reuse and Recycling of Batteries Employed in Electric Vehicles Research Study on Reuse and Recycling of Batteries Employed in Electric Vehicles: The Technical, Environmental, Economic, Energy and Cost Implications of Reusing and Recycling EV Batteries Project Report Prepared for Prepared by in association with and September, 2019 Table of Contents List of Tables .................................................................................................................................................... 7 List of Figures ................................................................................................................................................... 8 List of Acronyms .............................................................................................................................................. 1 Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................................... 1 1 Background and Objectives to the Study ......................................................................................... 1 2 Methodology ................................................................................................................................... 2 3 EV Battery Sales, End-of-Life Projections, Management Options, and Future Designs ................... 3 3.1 EV Sales in the US 2011 to 2018 ............................................................................................................. 3 3.2 Projections of EV Adoption Rates in the US ..................................................................................... 5 3.3 Estimated Amounts of End-of-Life EV Batteries Projected for the US ............................................. 7 3.4 Batteries from Electric Buses in the US ............................................................................................ 9 3.5 Options for EV End of Life Batteries .............................................................................................. 11 3.6 Collection of EV Batteries.............................................................................................................. 12 3.7 Future Li-ion Battery Chemistries .................................................................................................. 13 3.8 Future EV Battery Designs ............................................................................................................. 16 3.9 Projections of Future Cost of EV Batteries ..................................................................................... 18 4 EV Battery Reuse ................................................................................................................................... 20 4.1 EV Battery Reuse Terminology ............................................................................................................. 20 4.2 EV Battery Reuse Examples ........................................................................................................... 20 4.2.1 Reuse in EVs .................................................................................................................................. 24 4.2.2 Reuse of Individual Battery Cells ................................................................................................... 25 4.2.3 Reuse in Energy Storage Systems .................................................................................................. 26 4.3 Examples of EV Battery Reuse Companies ........................................................................................... 30 4.3.1 Spiers New Technologies (SNT), Oklahoma City, US...................................................................... 31 4.3.2 IT Asset Partners (ITAP), Chatsworth, California (US) .................................................................... 34 4.3.3 Other Battery Reuse Companies ................................................................................................... 35 4.4 Costs of EV Battery Reuse .............................................................................................................. 36 4.5 Technical and Policy Issues with EV Battery Reuse ........................................................................ 39 4.5.1 Additional Lifespan in Second Use ................................................................................................ 39 KELLEHER RESEARCH STUDY ON REUSE AND RECYCLING OF BATTERIES EMPLOYED IN ELECTRIC VEHICLES FINAL REPORT SEPTEMBER, 2019 PAGE 3 4.5.2 Provenance and Tracking of Reused EV Batteries and Cells .......................................................... 40 4.5.3 Standards, Safety and Standardized Terminology ......................................................................... 41 4.5.4 Liability .......................................................................................................................................... 43 4.5.5 Variability of Chemistries and Cell/Pack Formats .......................................................................... 44 4.5.6 Transportation and Logistics ......................................................................................................... 44 4.5.7 Battery Storage Technology Changes Rapidly ............................................................................... 46 5 EV Battery Recycling ..................................................................................................................... 47 5.1 High Level Description of Recycling Processes and Steps .............................................................. 47 5.2 Major Traditional Nickel and Lithium Battery Recyclers ................................................................ 48 5.2.1 Retriev ........................................................................................................................................... 50 5.2.2 Umicore ......................................................................................................................................... 53 5.2.3 INMETCO, Pennsylvania (US) ......................................................................................................... 55 5.2.4 Glencore-Sudbury Integrated Nickel Operations, Sudbury, Ontario (Canada) .............................. 56 5.2.5 Battery Solutions, Wixom, Michigan (US) ..................................................................................... 57 5.2.6 Raw Materials Company Inc. – Port Colborne, Ontario (Canada) ................................................. 58 5.2.7 EV Battery Recycling by Tesla ........................................................................................................ 58 5.2.8 SungEel MCC Americas (SMCC), Endicott, New York (US) ............................................................. 60 5.2.9 Battery Resourcers, Worcester, Massachusetts (US) .................................................................... 61 5.3 Developing EV Battery Recycling Technologies and Businesses ..................................................... 62 5.3.1 American Manganese Inc. ............................................................................................................. 63 5.3.2 Neometals ..................................................................................................................................... 68 5.3.3 Li-Cycle .......................................................................................................................................... 74 5.3.4 Fortum, Finland ............................................................................................................................. 76 5.3.5 Lithion Recycling Inc. ..................................................................................................................... 77 5.4 Costs of EV Battery Recycling ........................................................................................................ 77 5.4.1 American Manganese Cost Analysis .............................................................................................. 78 5.4.2 Element Energy Cost Analysis ........................................................................................................ 81 5.5 Technical Challenges with EV Battery Recycling ............................................................................ 83 6 Environmental, Energy, and Cost Impacts of EV Battery Reuse and Recycling............................... 86 6.1 Energy and Environmental Impacts of EV Battery Reuse ...................................................................... 86 6.2 Energy Impacts of EV Battery Recycling ......................................................................................... 92 KELLEHER RESEARCH STUDY ON REUSE AND RECYCLING OF BATTERIES EMPLOYED IN ELECTRIC VEHICLES FINAL REPORT SEPTEMBER, 2019 PAGE 4 6.3 Environmental Impacts of EV Battery Recycling ............................................................................ 95 6.4 Comparison of Energy and Environmental Impacts of EV Battery Reuse vs. Recycling ............... 103 6.5 Economic Impacts of EV Battery Reuse vs. Recycling................................................................... 104 7 Ongoing Research, Current and Future Legislation .................................................................... 107 7.1 Selected Research in the US ....................................................................................................... 107 7.1.1 US DOE Lithium Battery Research Initiative ...................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • POSITION STATEMENT: UNFAIR TAXES for ELECTRIC VEHICLES This Position Is Supported by the Following Drive Electric Minnesota Policy Committee Members
    POSITION STATEMENT: UNFAIR TAXES FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES This position is supported by the following Drive Electric Minnesota Policy Committee members: Alliance for Transportation Electrification Minnesota Electric Vehicle Owners American Lung Association in Minnesota Minnesota Power City of Minneapolis Otter Tail Power Company Connexus Energy Plug In America Elk River Municipal Utilities Shift2Electric Fresh Energy Xcel Energy Great River Energy Electric vehicle (EV) users should pay their fair share for the use of Minnesota roads, but they should not pay MORE than owners of equivalent conventional vehicles or than their fair share. Upkeep for Minnesota’s roads relies significantly on the Highway Users Tax Distribution Fund, which is funded through a combination of fuel tax revenue (including gasoline tax and $75 EV tax), license fees (including registration taxes), and motor vehicle sales taxes. Auto parts sales taxes and other sources also provide funding.1 Why is Drive Electric Minnesota concerned about unfair new taxes on EVs? • EVs already pay more than their fair share. EV drivers currently pay a $75 annual tax in lieu of a gas tax in addition to paying more in motor vehicle sales tax and registration tax than someone buying a comparable gasoline vehicle. In total highway taxes, EV owners already pay more over the life of the vehicle than the average gas vehicle driver, as shown in figure 1. • Inconsistent with the user-pays principle: The current gas tax model assesses a fee on a driver based on their vehicle’s fuel economy (miles per gallon) and how much they drive. Drivers of vehicles with low fuel economy (few miles per gallon) need to fuel their tank more, as do drivers that drive a lot.
    [Show full text]
  • Plug-In Electric Vehicle Showcases: Consumer Experience and Acceptance
    Plug-In Electric Vehicle Showcases: Consumer Experience and Acceptance Mark Singer National Renewable Energy Laboratory NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Technical Report Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy NREL/TP-5400-75707 Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC July 2020 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications. Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 Plug-In Electric Vehicle Showcases: Consumer Experience and Acceptance Mark Singer National Renewable Energy Laboratory Suggested Citation Singer, Mark. 2020. Plug-In Electric Vehicle Showcases: Consumer Experience and Acceptance. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. NREL/TP-5400-75707. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy20osti/75707.pdf NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Technical Report Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy NREL/TP-5400-75707 Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC July 2020 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy National Renewable Energy Laboratory Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications. 15013 Denver West Parkway Golden, CO 80401 Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov NOTICE This work was authored by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, operated by Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC, for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308. Funding provided by U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Vehicle Technologies Office. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the DOE or the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 10-31-19 Transcript Bulletin
    TOOELE Stansbury TRANSCRIPT finishes 5th at state See A10 DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME ENDS BULLETIN THIS SUNDAY MORNING • NOVEMBER 3, 2019 THURSDAY October 31, 2019 www.TooeleOnline.com Vol. 126 No. 44 $1.00 County accepts 2020 tentative budget without tax increase Tripp says county can’t go long without an increase, but is in trend of spending less TIM GILLIE “There was a lot of team- EDITOR work and a studious effort by Tooele County has a tenta- department heads,” she said. tive 2020 budget with reduced “We asked for a 1.5% reduc- A ghostly couple stand guard with a crew of pirate skeletons in the front yard of a home on the eastside of Tooele on 1310 North. general fund spending. tion and some doubled that. The Tooele County Some couldn’t, but we had an Commission voted to accept explanation.” the 2020 tentative budget The amended 2019 budget as presented by the Tooele calls for $56.5 million in rev- When it comes to Halloween, County Auditor during its enue and expenses, but after meeting Tuesday night at the reducing the budget by $18.5 Tooele County Building. million in one-time revenue for The 2020 general fund the sale of Utah Motorsports tentative budget calls for a bal- Campus, the 2019 budge low- some traditions never change anced $36.9 million in revenue ers to $38 million. The 2020 and expenses without any tax budget shows $36.9 million for increases, according to County the 2020 budget. Auditor Alison McCoy. The 2019 budget also used VIEWPOINT “We are sensitive to what is $5.3 million from the general going on in the valley and at fund balance to balance the this time we are not request- budget.
    [Show full text]
  • Written Remarks
    Plug In America 6380 Wilshire Blvd Suite 1000 Los Angeles, CA 90048 323-372-1236 June 19, 2020 Nevada Legislative Committee on Energy 401 S. Carson Street Carson City, NV 89701-4747 Submitted via email to Assemblywoman Daniele Monroe-Moreno ([email protected]); Senator Chris Brooks ([email protected]); and Marjorie Paslov-Thomas ([email protected]) Re: SCR 3 Transportation Funding Solutions Dear Chair Monroe-Moreno and Vice-Chair Brooks: On behalf of the electric vehicle (EV) drivers in Nevada that we represent, Plug In America would like to thank you for your leadership with the Senate Concurrent Resolution 3 (SCR3) process, particularly given these challenging times. EVs provide significant benefits to all Nevadans, and we urge you to take these benefits into account as you finalize the report on alternative solutions for transportation funding in Nevada, including what fees – if any – should be assessed to EV drivers in Nevada. Plug In America is the nation’s leading independent consumer voice for accelerating the use of EVs in the United States to consumers, policymakers, auto manufacturers and others. Formed as a non-profit in 2008, Plug In America provides practical, objective information collected from our coalition of plug-in vehicle drivers through public outreach and education, policy work and a range of technical advisory services. Our expertise represents the world’s deepest pool of experience of driving and living with plug­ in vehicles.1 The solutions to solving the immediate transportation funding shortfalls in Nevada – and also nationwide – require major shifts in how the funding has historically been implemented.
    [Show full text]
  • Electric Drive by '25
    ELECTRIC DRIVE BY ‘25: How California Can Catalyze Mass Adoption of Electric Vehicles by 2025 September 2012 About this Report This policy paper is the tenth in a series of reports on how climate change will create opportunities for specific sectors of the business community and how policy-makers can facilitate those opportunities. Each paper results from one-day workshop discussions that include representatives from key business, academic, and policy sectors of the targeted industries. The workshops and resulting policy papers are sponsored by Bank of America and produced by a partnership of the UCLA School of Law’s Environmental Law Center & Emmett Center on Climate Change and the Environment and UC Berkeley School of Law’s Center for Law, Energy & the Environment. Authorship The author of this policy paper is Ethan N. Elkind, Bank of America Climate Policy Associate for UCLA School of Law’s Environmental Law Center & Emmett Center on Climate Change and the Environment and UC Berkeley School of Law’s Center for Law, Energy & the Environment (CLEE). Additional contributions to the report were made by Sean Hecht and Cara Horowitz of the UCLA School of Law and Steven Weissman of the UC Berkeley School of Law. Acknowledgments The author and organizers are grateful to Bank of America for its generous sponsorship of the workshop series and input into the formulation of both the workshops and the policy paper. We would specifically like to thank Anne Finucane, Global Chief Strategy and Marketing Officer, and Chair of the Bank of America Environmental Council, for her commitment to this work.
    [Show full text]
  • Clean Air Rule
    Small Business Economic Impact Statement Chapter 173-442 WAC Clean Air Rule Chapter 173-441 WAC Reporting of Emissions of Greenhouse Gases June 2016 Publication no. 16-02-009 Publication and Contact Information This report is available on the Department of Ecology’s website at https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/SummaryPages/1602009.html For more information contact: Air Quality Program P.O. Box 47600 Olympia, WA 98504-7600 Phone: 360-407-6800 Washington State Department of Ecology – www.ecy.wa.gov o Headquarters, Olympia 360-407-6000 o Northwest Regional Office, Bellevue 425-649-7000 o Southwest Regional Office, Olympia 360-407-6300 o Central Regional Office, Union Gap 509-575-2490 o Eastern Regional Office, Spokane 509-329-3400 Accommodation Requests: To request ADA accommodation including materials in a format for the visually impaired, call Ecology at 360-407-6800. Persons with impaired hearing may call Washington Relay Service at 711. Persons with speech disability may call TTY at 877-833-6341. Small Business Economic Impact Statement Chapter 173-442 WAC Clean Air Rule Chapter 173-441 WAC Reporting of Emissions of Greenhouse Gases Prepared by Kasia Patora Shon Kraley, PhD Rules & Accountability Section Rules & Accountability Section WA Department of Ecology WA Department of Ecology Supporting work by: Carrie Sessions, Rules & Accountability Section, WA Department of Ecology Neil Caudill, Air Quality Program, WA Department of Ecology Bill Drumheller, Air Quality Program, WA Department of Ecology for the Air Quality Program Washington State Department of Ecology Olympia, Washington Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ ii Chapter 1: Background and Introduction .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bay Area—Plug-In Electric Vehicle Readiness Plan—Summary 2013 Executive Summary
    California Energy Commission DOCKETED 14-IEP-1B TN 72532 AUG 04 2014 Bay Area Plug-In Electric Vehicle Readiness Plan Summary 2013 December 2013 Prepared for In Partnership with Prepared by Disclaimer This report was prepared as a result of work sponsored by the California Energy Commission. It does not necessarily represent the views of the Commission, its employees, or the State of California. The Commission, the State of California, its employees, contractors, and subcontractors make no warranty, expressed or implied, and assume no legal liability for the information in this document; nor does any party represent that the use of this information will not infringe upon privately owned rights. This report was also prepared as a result of work sponsored, paid for, in whole or in part, by a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Award to the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of SCAQMD or the DOE. The SCAQMD and DOE, their officers, employees, contractors, and subcontractors make no warranty, expressed or implied, and assume no legal liability for the information in this report. The SCAQMD and DOE have not approved or disapproved this report, nor have the SCAQMD or DOE passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of the information contained herein. Acknowledgements The Bay Area is fortunate to have a broad and diverse set of contributors working to enable this region to support an accelerated adoption rate of plug-in electric vehicles between now and 2025. Stakeholders contributed to the preparation of this document by conducting targeted outreach and interviews and by providing key data and valuable feedback.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Automotive Technologies: the Eco-Friendly Revolution
    E-Leader Prague 2015 Strategic Automotive Technologies: The Eco-Friendly Revolution Frank Owarish, Ph.D. Executive Director International Institute for Strategic Research and Training New York, New York, USA Abstract This paper is a compilation paper, in that it compiles credible sets of information available on the various aspects of the subject with an educational purpose in mind. It also has analytical aspects. From evolution to revolution Transportation systems have been key to human progress and are the basis of the modern civilization hinging on the Industrial Revolution. The invention of the internal combustion engine was an absolute turning point; even today its use is crucial despite significant development of other technologies powering cars, trucks, buses Origin of the internal combustion engine The first person to experiment with an internal-combustion engine was the Dutch physicist Christian Huygens, about 1680. But no effective gasoline-powered engine was developed until 1859, when the French engineer J. J. Étienne Lenoir built a double-acting, spark-ignition engine that could be operated continuously. In 1862 Alphonse Beau de Rochas, a French scientist, patented but did not build a four-stroke engine; sixteen years later, when Nikolaus A. Otto built a successful four-stroke engine, it became known as the "Otto cycle." The first successful two- stroke engine was completed in the same year by Sir Dougald Clerk, in a form which (simplified somewhat by Joseph Day in 1891) remains in use today. George Brayton, an American engineer, had developed a two-stroke kerosene engine in 1873, but it was too large and too slow to be commercially successful.
    [Show full text]
  • Disproportionate Burden Index by County for Tennessee (September XXVII 2018)
    State of Tennessee’s Beneficiary Mitigation Plan Volkswagen Settlement Environmental Mitigation Trust Prepared by the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation Date of Release: September 21, 2018 The following represents the State of Tennessee’s Beneficiary Mitigation Plan under the Volkswagen Environmental Mitigation Trust. Learn more about the Volkswagen Environmental Mitigation Trust at https://www.tn.gov/environment/VWSettlement. If it is hard for you to read, speak, or understand English, the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) may be able to provide translation or interpretation services free of charge. Please contact Angela McGee at 615-741-2994 for more information. TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................................ i List of Figures ..................................................................................................................................................... iii List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................................... iii Acronyms and Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................... iv I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 1 A. Overview of
    [Show full text]
  • Efficient Dynamics
    A subsidiary of BMW AG BMW U.S. Press Information For Release: Immediate Contact: Oleg Satanovsky BMW Product & Technology Spokesperson 201-307-3755 / [email protected] Alex Schmuck BMW Product & Technology Communications Manager 201-307-3783 / [email protected] The New 2022 BMW i4 eDrive40 and i4 M50 • New generation of purely electric vehicles from BMW. • i4 eDrive40 with 335 hp and rear-wheel drive. Estimated range up to 300 miles. • i4 M50 with 536 hp and all-wheel drive. Estimated range up to 245 miles. • MSRP of $55,400 for eDrive40 and $65,900 for M50. Plus $995 Destination. • U.S. market launch expected in Q1 of 2022. Woodcliff Lake, NJ – June 1, 2021…Today, BMW is proud to announce the newest additions to the BMW i brand, the i4 eDrive40 and i4 M50 models. The i4 M50 is the first fully- electric performance model to come from BMW M GmbH. The i4 blends the functionality and space of the gran coupe design with the instantaneous power delivery of BMW’s latest 5th generation eDrive. Class-leading driving dynamics and long-distance comfort, elegant design, uncompromising workmanship, cutting-edge user-vehicle interface and advanced infotainment and driving assistance technologies all combine to deliver a zero-emissions BMW worthy of the Ultimate Driving Machine moniker. Power is provided by BMW’s latest 5th generation eDrive technology which combines the electric motors, power electronics, charging system and high-voltage battery. The electric motor, power electronics and transmission share one compact housing while the high-voltage battery measures only 4.3-inches in height and is mounted low in the floor of the new i4 for improved vehicle agility.
    [Show full text]
  • Canada: 2021 Durango SRT Hellcat
    Contact: Daniela Ferro LouAnn Gosselin Cat out of Hell: Dodge//SRT Introduces the Most Powerful SUV Ever – 2021 Durango SRT Hellcat For Muscle Car People With Families, the New 2021 Dodge Durango Features New Aggressive Exterior Styling, a New Interior With a Driver-Centric Cockpit and the New 710-horsepower Durango SRT Hellcat Powered by the legendary supercharged 6.2-litre HEMI® Hellcat V-8 engine and paired with the quick- shifting TorqueFlite 8HP95 eight-speed automatic transmission, the Durango, the three-row muscle car joins Challenger and Charger in Hellcat form, delivering 710 horsepower and 645 lb.-ft. of torque Durango SRT Hellcat runs 0-60 mph in 3.5 seconds, has a National Hot Rod Association (NHRA) – certified quarter-mile elapsed time of 11.5 seconds, a top speed of 290 kilometres per hour (180 miles per hour) and runs 1.5 seconds faster than the SRT 392 on a 3.4-kilometre (2.1-mile) road course, equal to 9 car lengths after one lap Dodge will build the Durango SRT Hellcat for the 2021 model year only The 2021 Durango lineup features an updated aggressive exterior with a forward-leaning profile capturing Charger Widebody design cues with the new front fascia, LED low/high headlamps, LED daytime running lamps (DRL) signatures, grille, rear spoiler and wheel options Performance-inspired interior features a new driver-oriented cockpit, including new instrument panel, wrapped and accent stitched mid-bolster and centre console, upgraded door panels, and the all-new five- times faster Uconnect 5, with the available 10.1-inch touchscreen
    [Show full text]
  • Car Wars 2020-2023 the Rise (And Fall) of the Crossover?
    The US Automotive Product Pipeline Car Wars 2020-2023 The Rise (and Fall) of the Crossover? Equity | 10 May 2019 Car Wars thesis and investment relevance Car Wars is an annual proprietary study that assesses the relative strength of each automaker’s product pipeline in the US. The purpose is to quantify industry product trends, and then relate our findings to investment decisions. Our thesis is fairly straightforward: we believe replacement rate drives showroom age, which drives market United States Autos/Car Manufacturers share, which drives profits and stock prices. OEMs with the highest replacement rate and youngest showroom age have generally gained share from model years 2004-19. John Murphy, CFA Research Analyst Ten key findings of our study MLPF&S +1 646 855 2025 1. Product activity remains reasonably robust across the industry, but the ramp into a [email protected] softening market will likely drive overcrowding and profit pressure. Aileen Smith Research Analyst 2. New vehicle introductions are 70% CUVs and Light Trucks, and just 24% Small and MLPF&S Mid/Large Cars. The material CUV overweight (45%) will likely pressure the +1 646 743 2007 [email protected] segment’s profitability to the low of passenger cars, and/or will leave dealers with a Yarden Amsalem dearth of entry level product to offer, further increasing an emphasis on used cars. Research Analyst MLPF&S 3. Product cadence overall continues to converge, making the market increasingly [email protected] competitive, which should drive incremental profit pressure across the value chain. Gwen Yucong Shi 4.
    [Show full text]